Offsite construction in the Australian low-rise residential buildings application levels and procurement options

Abstract

Purpose

Prefabricated housing has become a boom industry across the world; however, the uptake of offsite construction (OSC) approaches in Australian low-rise buildings is rather low compared with high-rise buildings in other countries. This study aims to investigate and analyse the adoption of different levels of OSC approaches and the selection of different procurement options in Australian low-rise residential buildings.

Design/methodology/approach

The research objectives were pursued through a mixed research method. An empirical questionnaire survey was carried out with 35 professionals in the Australian building and construction industry. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 interviewees and analysed using thematic analysis method in NVivo software.

Findings

The research results found that the most suitable OSC level for Australian low-rise buildings is components-based prefabrication and identified the barriers to OSC uptake for each OSC level. The study also showed that the best option of procuring prefabricated products is from Australian manufacturers, followed by Australian suppliers/dealers and overseas manufacturers. Panelised prefabrication and components-based prefabrication are ranked as the most suitable OSC approaches for Australian manufacturers. Modular prefabrication is regarded as the most suitable for overseas manufacturer, while components-based prefabrication is the most suitable for Australian suppliers/dealers.

Originality/value

The selection of various OSC approaches and different procurement options in the low-rise residential buildings are scarcely explored topic, and thus, this study provides knowledge of interest for both researchers and practitioners.

Citation

Lin, T., Lyu, S., Yang, R.J. and Tivendale, L. (2022), "Offsite construction in the Australian low-rise residential buildings application levels and procurement options", Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 110-140. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-07-2020-0583